2. amps-preamps
  3. 1016076595

NAD takes on the Krell Beast 1800 vs 6700??

My friend has a Adcom 700 CDP,Krell KBL linestage,NAD S-200 amp 225wpc.Diva 6.1 speakers 88ohmHis friend is selling a Krell KSA-250 250+ wpcWe listened to the Krell for one day then the next day the NAD.The Krell was run balanced with a Transparent Audio Super Link power cord.The NAD was run unbalanced with the stock power cord.The Krell had tactile kick drum slam,clear highs and very clean mids.The soundstage was wide but lacked depth.I was surprised at the flat soundstage.Imaging was so,so.Overall it sounded boring.With the NAD the very first thing I noticed is how it almost sounded 'tube like'.It was smoother and warmer.The soundstage was not quite as wide as the Krell but it had real depth.Imaging way better.The NAD won hands down.WHY??
david99
celtic66
1,616 posts
 
The Emperor has not clothes. I've listened to Krell over the past 5 years, but only occassionally as I find it to truly be some of the most unmusical equipment available. It is quick, solid and extremely harsh. NAD has over its history at least always tended toward musical.

Great marketing, poor product. Any number of amplification products to include VTL, Plinius, Audio Refinement will hands down beat Krell musically. Period.
boski
8 posts
 
I've had the NAD S200 for some time now. It is an undiscovered gem and it does indeed sound tubelike. Most audiophiles see "NAD" and think.....well, just another mid-fi warm sounding NAD product like all the other grey NAD stuff. The Silver NAD S200 and the companion S100 pre are leaps and bounds beyond your average NAD products. These NAD Silvers are certainly worth a listen.
biscayne
8 posts
 
How would you compare the NAD S200 v. NAD C370/C270 combination? Is the S200 more transparent, detailed? I'm looking for that nth degree of clarity and musicality without spending thousands.
anne_audiophile
42 posts
 
my experience with krell has been more positive. i have krell ksa 100s , audible illusions modulus 3 pre-amp, micromega dac and transport and apogee stage...results: 3 D imaging, sweet highs, warm and palpable midrange. bass was good but could be tighter. i am rather pleased with the sound. i've heard the ksa 250 in the past and thought it was a nice amp though i did not compare it directly with NAD.
karls
332 posts
 
I like Celtic66's description of older Krells the best: quick, solid, and harsh. Amen to that! They do make great subwoofer amps, but even there they can be equaled by any number of amps for a whole lot less money and electricity. Of course, like everything else, Krells have gotten better. The KSA series is really showing its age.
More to discover